Same-sex marriage

"Two weeks after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that some businesses may discriminate against LGBTQ+ people on First Amendment grounds, a Texas judge is once again arguing for her right to refuse to marry same-gender couples. Dianne Hensley, a justice of the peace in Waco, has refused to sign marriage licenses for same-gender applicants for years. After the state Commission on Judicial Conduct sanctioned her in 2019 for refusing to perform her duties impartially, Hensley unsuccessfully sued the panel for damages, arguing she could not be compelled to violate her religious beliefs. Last week, the Texas Tribune reports, Hensley filed a petition with the Texas Supreme Court citing last month’s 303 Creative decision — which held that a private business could not be compelled to provide services related to same-gender weddings — as precedent to award her $10,000 in damages. The court agreed to revive Hensley’s suit against the commission in June, days before the 303 Creative decision was made public."

"Hensley’s “sincere religious objections to homosexual behavior and same-sex marriage,” the petition reads, are constitutionally protected even in her role as a judge. According to the petition, the 303 Creative decision “rejects the idea of a ‘compelling interest’ in forcing wedding vendors to participate” in marriages that are contrary to their religious beliefs. The petition argues that 303 Creative undermines the state’s case, which rested on its “compelling interest” in requiring Hensley to affirm all legal marriages. But there’s a big asterisk next to Hensley’s argument, because of course, a judge is a member of the government sworn to uphold the law to the best of their ability, not a business owner selling goods or services. “The law of the land is marriage equality. It’s as simple as that,” said Equality Texas spokesperson Johnathan Gooch in a statement to the Texas Tribune. “If judges and justices of the peace were empowered to only enforce the laws that they agreed with, we would quickly descend into anarchy.”"

"The decision saw the court side with a Colorado website designer who sued for the right to refuse service to LGBTQ\+ people. Hensley has previously been represented in her suit by the law firm First Liberty Institute, which has argued on its website that since Hensley’s staff signed same-gender marriage licenses at a different office blocks away, no rights had actually been violated — even though that seems like the literal definition of “separate but equal” segregationist policies, which were outlawed in the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Last week’s petition was filed on Hensley’s behalf by Jonathan F. Mitchell, a former Texas Solicitor General and the architect of the state’s infamous Senate Bill 8 “bounty” law that allows individuals to sue anyone who “aids or abets” an abortion. LGBTQ+ activists have decried the 303 Creative decision in the past two weeks, pointing out that details of the case appeared to have been falsified. But conservatives have already jumped on the decision to justify denying service to LGBTQ+ people, adding insult to injury where possible. One Michigan hair salon owner announced last week that transgender people were no longer welcome at her business, recommending they “seek services at a local pet groomer” instead."

"In 2000, the citizens of California passed a statewide referendum, with 61 percent support, which said that “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” It was a major victory for the sanctity of traditional marriage. By passing the referendum (Proposition 22), the people of California gave the final word on what is morally right and permissible, correct? Well, based on recent actions by the California legislature, apparently not. In the last legislative session, Democrat Paul Koretz introduced a bill to create civil unions, giving homosexual couples “comprehensive legal status parallel to civil marriage laws.” By introducing Assembly Bill 1338, Democrats (and a few Republicans) sought to override the people and legalize homosexual marriage. Thanks to the efforts of California Republicans (and a few Democrats) Koretz withdrew the bill. However, Koretz will reintroduce it next year. The movement to legitimize the homosexual lifestyle and homosexual marriages is strong and must be vigorously opposed. Homosexuals themselves should not be demonized; however, their lifestyle deserves absolutely no special legal status. The Tory hopes and prays that California legislators and activists who courageously opposed AB 1338 this year will do so for years to come."

"Republicans, who have consistently been the party group least in favor of same-sex marriage, show majority support in 2021 for the first time (55%). The latest increase in support among all Americans is driven largely by changes in Republicans views. Democrats have consistently been among the biggest supporters of legal same-sex marriage. The current 83% among Democrats is on par with the level of support Gallup has recorded over the past few years. This could suggest that support for gay marriage has reached a ceiling for this group, at least for now. Meanwhile, support among political independents, now at 73%, is slightly higher than the 68% to 71% range recorded from 2017 to 2020."

"Speculation of whether the U.S. Supreme Court will take a case to overturn same-sex marriage at the federal level is mounting after embattled Kentucky Clerk Kim Davis pushed the effort as far up the legal chain as possible. Davis attorney, Matthew Staver, previously told Newsweek he is optimistic the court will again rule on Obergefell v. Hodges, the landmark case that guaranteed the right to same-sex marriage nationwide. William Powell, the attorney who represented the couple that sued Davis, previously wrote in a statement provided to Newsweek that he is "confident the Supreme Court will likewise agree that Davis arguments do not merit further attention." Obergefell v. Hodges, as part of a 5-4 Supreme Court ruling in June 2015, guaranteed that same-sex couples can marry by the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution. Prior the Courts ruling, equal rights and protections for same-sex marriage was already established in 36 states by statutes, court rulings, or voter initiatives. Davis made national headlines just two months after the Obergefell v. Hodges decision when she defied a U.S. federal court order to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. After being elected clerk of Rowan County, Kentucky, in 2014, she was defeated by Democratic challenger Elwood Caudill Jr. in 2018."

"Under the Constitution, same-sex couples seek in marriage the same legal treatment as opposite-sex couples, and it would disparage their choices and diminish their personhood to deny them this right."

"Still it is true that many same-sex couples want nothing more than to join society as fully integrated socially responsible family-centered taxpaying Little League-coaching nation-serving respectably married citizens. So why not welcome them in? Why not recruit them by the vanload to sweep in on heroic wings and save the flagging and battered old institution of matrimony from a bunch of apathetic neer-do-well heterosexual deadbeats like me?"

"Todays 70% support for same-sex marriage marks a new milestone in a trend that has pointed upward for a quarter of a century. A small minority of Americans (27%) supported legal recognition of gay and lesbian marriages in 1996, when Gallup first asked the question. But support rose steadily over time, eventually reaching the majority level for the first time in 2011. By the time of the Supreme Courts Obergefell v. Hodges decision in 2015, support for gay marriage had reached 60%. Since then, the issue has been less prominent in U.S. politics, and public support for same-sex marriage has continued to increase."

"As would be expected at a high-water mark in national support for same-sex marriage, all age groups are the most supportive they have been to date. Still, age differences remain, with 84% of young adults, 72% of middle-aged adults, and 60% of older adults saying they favor same-sex marriage."

"Its very dear to me, the issue of gay marriage. Or as I like to call it: marriage. You know, because I had lunch this afternoon, not “gay lunch”. I parked my car; I didnt “gay park” it."

"New Rule: Gay marriage wont lead to dog marriage. It is not a slippery slope to rampant inter-species coupling. When women got the right to vote, it didnt lead to hamsters voting. No court has extended the equal protection clause to salmon. And for the record, all marriages are “same sex” marriages. You get married, and every night, its the same sex."